Drug War Debate Thread

[McAfee]

Drugs should not be legal. Drugs cause massive harm to families and communities. Singapore and other East Asian nations have the right idea, and before the usual excuses like "what about alcohol," alcohol is impossible to ban. If I could ban it, I would, but even so, how many alcoholics overdose on the street or rob a store to get their fix? Basically, nobody the other copes are "freedom," but freedom is a meaningless buzzword in my view. People who are sober are more free than drug addicts who have little to no control over their actions.

Portland, Oregon, has shown why drug legalization efforts fail, as well as rehabilitation and treating addiction as a disease, which are pseudosciences. This whole compasionate approach leads to more addicts and more deaths in America. There is also basically no war on drugs, even in dark red states like Oklahoma, where pot is legal in all but name as medicinal pot, which is basically the same thing as recreational pot. Pot is a slap on the wrist crime, yet potheads act like it's the 1950s, even though most cops won't even arrest potheads. But legalization advocates pretend there's a war on drugs and say it failed even though Singapore and the Philippines actual war on drugs worked out well.

Here's a good debate between Peter Hitchens and a drug addict who overdosed named Matthew Perry, showing how stupid legalization is.

So convince me why I'm wrong and that drugs should be legal without resorting to insults and logical fallacies.

 

[Beautiful Border]

The thing about "drugs" is that they're not all equally bad. There are plenty of drugs that are both harmful and legal (benzos and prescription opiates spring to mind). For example, I don't think it really makes sense for alcohol to be legal but not cannabis.

It's difficult to talk about this topic in broad strokes because you have to specify which drugs you think should be prohibited, which should be prescription-only and which should be legal to buy over-the-counter. You can't just say "ban all drugs" because it turns out most drugs are actually pretty helpful if you aren't an addict who abuses them. The sensible approach lies somewhere inbetween "being able to buy meth at Walgreens" and "executing people for taking aspirin".

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

I literally can't think of one reason to make drugs legal.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

No War on Drugs? You’re an idiot. Police regularly raid people’s private homes (often the wrong addresses) in the middle of the night with battering rams and guns blazing over drugs. Half your prison inmates are in for drug crimes and the US incarcerates more of its people than anyone else in the civilized and most of the uncivilized world. By forcing drugs into a black market it fuels endless violence and chaos in the cities and our neighboring countries and guarantees there’s no meaningful quality control, no FDA oversight, no courts and police to arbitrate, just the law of the jungle. Every type of social dysfunction associated with Prohibition is on full display with the War on Drugs, a war that began long after narcotics became a part of American life, and that has largely worsened in its presence.

As for the role of freedom, go to China, or hang yourself. It’s not your call to make for other people, Wannabe Eurotrash.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

The sensible approach lies somewhere inbetween "being able to buy meth at Walgreens" and "executing people for taking aspirin".

LSD should be sold over the counter at Walmart.
Free heroin for marginalized racial and sexual minorities. Fent available on request.
Acetaminophen (Tylenol) = Controlled Substance.

 

[Captain Wetbeard]

I literally can't think of one reason to make drugs legal.

Cost and waste of police resources. I don't really care if weak willed people choose to destroy their own lives, I'd rather police resources were directed towards things that actually matter. That isn't to say they should be allowed to act like retards, drug use should be a sentencing enhancement so that junkies get more prison time when they cause problems.

 

[Big Brutus]

In a high-trust society built on the back of Enlightenment philosophy, we recognize three fundamental rights: the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to property. A big part of all three is the right to bodily autonomy. It goes something like: "well, I have the right to live my life as I please, be it that I'm not infringing on another's right to do the same. My body is my property and I have the liberty to do with it as I please."

I'm not going to sit here and advocate for armed government agents to beat people's doors down with battering rams, armored cars and machine guns, all over their exercising their rights. If someone wants to smoke crack, it's not my problem. I don't like crack, it's disgusting to me, but here's the thing: it's reasonable for me to refuse to smoke crack, it's not reasonable for me to demand Big Brother use violence against someone else for smoking crack.

We already tried banning alcohol and that didn't work. When you criminalize the possession, use or distribution of a substance, be it alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, what-have-you, you just push the consumerbase and economy for that substance underground, eliminating transparency and regulation. As it stands in my state, the sale of liquor is handled by state-licensed businesses subject to regulatory oversight. Marijuana is the same. Decriminalization and licensing is proven to be a better way of handling issues with drugs.

 

[Dr. Eldon Tyrell]

No, they shouldn't. If you have issues getting what you want, you shouldn't.
Because:
It means you're either broke, because you're addicted or you are too tarded to get what you want affordably and in turn too tarded to not become addicted.

 

[gagabobo1997]

Does this include caffeine OP? Should coffee drinkers be locked up?

alcohol is impossible to ban.

alcohol is just as possible to ban as every other drug. It would just be far more unpopular to ban because unlike OP most normal human beings enjoy some amount of drugs.

 

[McAfee]

Does this include caffeine OP? Should coffee drinkers be locked up?

How many coffee addicts overdose on the side of the street? How many coffee addicts rob a store to buy a Starbucks coffee? The answer is most likely zero, so this argument fails.

alcohol is just as possible to ban as every other drug

Not true. You would need to ban rice, sugar, grapes, and any other ingredients used in alcohol.

It would just be far more unpopular to ban because unlike OP most normal human beings enjoy some amount of drugs.

Pot is unpopular to ban, but I don't care because most people are stupid.

 

[gagabobo1997]

How many coffee addicts overdose on the side of the street?

Probably a very similar number to potheads and hallucinogen users, 0.

Not true. You would need to ban rice, sugar, grapes, and any other ingredients used in alcohol.

Yeah and to ban weed and shrooms and tobacco you'd have to ban dirt and water and sunlight used to grow them.

 

[McAfee]

Probably a very similar number to potheads and hallucinogen users, 0.

Thats total BS. People use psychedelics on the streets of Portland, Oregon.

Yeah and to ban weed and shrooms and tobacco you'd have to ban dirt and water and sunlight used to grow them.

not true at all. you don't make weed out of dirt and water, you can easily ban the plant.

 

[gagabobo1997]

Thats total BS. People use psychedelics on the streets of Portland, Oregon.

and none of them are overdosing from it

you don't make weed out of dirt and water, you can easily ban the plant.

then just ban the molecule ethanol and we can ban alcohol, right?

 

[McAfee]

and none of them are overdosing from it

Oh yeah, right, they are just "tweaking." Imagine if your son was doing drugs on the side of the street. Would you feel this way about them?

then just ban the molecule ethanol and we can ban alcohol, right?

Alcohol is ingrained in American culture; there's no way we could ban it vs. pot. Is not we can ban pot